the reality is we have progressive change. it does not change the fact that he can we can defend this country to a full extent. >> do you agree? >> sadly, i have to. i do not want to believe the president's politics and put it ahead of policy. i don't want to believe that we are paralyzed as a nation. the bottom line is that it only emboldened our adversaries around the world, and it makes us look weak and impetus. >> all presidents, political leaders, they do play politics. this president has just been so arrogant with it. basically they have lied about certain things. he said in the debate that the sequester would happen. lou: the curious way is the way in which the republicans are responding. not as a bold and strong and loyal opposition.

a voice in washington, the nation's capital to this administration and it's desperately needed. >> i mean come the only thing that i feel honored is that it's not big enough. they want that is the only thing that you see wrong with that? [talking over each other] [talking over each other] >> we have a 2 trillion-dollar deficit every year. we are probably not covering 85 billion. i mean, -- [talking over each other] [talking over each other] >> when you had bill clinton and newt gingrich, he stood strong. speaker boehner is not strong. lou: i hate to leave it there, but we are out of time. thank you all on the "a-team." we thank you for being with us. we are going to be talking about sequester and this administration tomorrow. it you may rest assured. we thank you for being with us

tonight speak ill because of you, mr. president, i think the republicans just called your bluff. welcome, everybody. i am neil cavuto. before the president tries to scare us on these cuts, he might take a good look at republicans to give him the power to avoid these cuts. not with more cuts, but different cuts. not because he says republicans are forcing him to make these cuts. they are not. they are offering to give him broader authority to cut what he sees appropriate within given department. not what the president says has been rammed down his throat through sequestration. i cannot stress enough how big of a deal this is, my friends. he already has this option, but he is just not using it. within the department of agriculture, you do not have to do a beeline for the beef

inspectors. it is amazing in the the media isn't all over this, until it puts them in the uncomfortable position that it is now on the president to respond to this. it is still republicans who are evil, he says, a president who has tried and tried to show that. meanwhile, the president started the sequestration idea and even waited and now suddenly he doesn't like it. deciding that will wallop those inspectors. republicans say it doesn't have to be that way, mr. president. they are letting him decide, which in washington is we are. it is ignoring their remarkable offer that nullifies all of the grounds and that, in effect, is even weirder. he knows these broader cuts are on him. they won't be so bad. were nearly as bad, which will make the republicans look good. but i think he is missing something. this will actually make him look

good. but the white house appears to sending him down the path of fears. as if finding horsemeat in ikea meatballs is enough. knowing full well that all of this is horse, well, you know. now this fox alert. markets are shaking in their boots. these guys are likely buying into an abyss. the dow is inching closer to an all-time high with 90 points. david webb, sandra smith. we have our guests on whether the markets are what they seem. what do you think is really going on here? >> scare tactics, and it's not working anymore. it was the debt ceiling, it was

the fiscal cliff, now it is the sequestration. these markets have had enough. they are seeing the fact that the fed chairman, ben bernanke this week was saying that he is going to continue to be a backstop for a weak economy. as long as he is, the stock market will go higher. it is almost comical the fact that we have gone up triple digits two straight days for the dow jones. points away from all-time highs. the so-called fear gauge in the market is down 13% today. there is not fear out there. the markets are telling us that a deal will get done. neil: i would just like to be clear here. are they thinking that there will be a midnight kind of a way to avoid this whole thing? >> there will be a way to avoid this whole thing. as you just pointed out come the , the republicans have put an option on the table that the president almost shouldn't or couldn't refuse. at this point, the president, he could look like a historical

legacy, he wanted to leave that of making an 11th hour deal, looking like he was being fair to both sides of the aisle. he could walk away and have the stock market skyrocket to all-time highs. he could look like a hero if he comes up with a deal here. >> well, you know, i see the market jumping even in the face of these automatic cuts on friday. what makes me think that is that the president is leading a meeting with democratic republican leaders when all of this kicks in. if you're trying to avoid something from kicking in, it becomes a moot point, which going back to its center is talking about, i think that they see this coming and they are not worried about it. >> that is true. they are not going to solve anything by it. this is a problem that has been going on since 9/11. but it's going to go through and it will only last for about three or four weeks.

in march we will come up with a bill that they need to pass, and that could negate everything. it's really a tough situation. then we will be operating from a lower spending level and we must make the argument that we can still grow and pay for all the government programming to be outlined in the state of the union. i don't think he has an argument there anymore. >> you are right if you think about the next battle. we run out of money, just a few weeks after this. >> yes, flames will fall out of the sky, your kids won't get taught anymore. this is the fear and loathing game. what i don't like is that we have president that is a petulant child. he is stamping his feet, he owns the narratives because the republicans gave it away. when we went through this debt ceiling battle, sequestration was a bad idea. kicking the can down the road. the president doesn't believe in this. he is not going to cut.

>> is typically what happens in washington. they haven't come up with a solution. we have political gains and economic solutions. stamp your feet all you want. holger meeting on friday, the first. the the real danger is the matter of this requester. neil: a lot of people see that and do not know what david is talking about. he said it so eloquently. i think this chart even shows that we are not putting anything. we are just slightly curtailing the growth in government. it will just go a little bit less. so that gets us back to this notion of whether we can get a deal to avoid the sequestration or something that i am seeing. in the end, it's no big deal

because we are still spending like drunken sailors. the market seems okay like that or ben bernanke is trying to rescue them from the fallout of that. but that is just a precarious foundation. >> nobody is seeing this as real cuts. we are hearing threats of multiple our lines at the tsa, the safety of your hamburger is going to be compromised, traders down here even on the floor were warned that this could impact trading, some products if they trade on a daily basis. the scare tactics are out there. but how much money are we really talking about here? the white house is talking about the congressional budget office. saying it's more like $44 billion. are we really talking about real cuts that would have a significant impact in the economy? the markets are telling us know. >> the markets are telling us that they don't reflect what is going on with the economy. the reality is that you cannot

connect a one-to-one correlation. the economy it is $44 billion. that is about 10 days worth, what we essentially have right now is a government that has decided we will take 10 days off from borrowing and it's the method that's the problem. neil: the bottom line is republicans have the short end of the polling stick. they are looking at being the villains, the obstinate, you know, and the president is trying to cobble together something constructively. how is it that they are always on defense? media. but as you said, it's a very small fraction. there isn't much to blame. this $85 billion that we are putting, we are not going to have a doomsday. if this does do anything to stabilize the economy and add a

level of certainty, that will be helpful for the economy. eventually it could be helpful for republicans. neil: just since we have been talking about this since the start of the show, we are another few hundred million bucks in debt. no wonder why house republicans are bringing that back. you decide. and the buyer's remorse in a big way. we will have that next. >> he does not believe in capitalism the way that americans do your finans can't manage themselves, but that doesn't mean th won't try. bring all your finances together

with the help of the one person who can, a certified financial planner professional. cfp -- let's make a plan.

>> every time we have a hearing like this, we are seeing this u.s. national debt and political

prop. >> the national debt clock will not be put on the screens during democratic time. neil: out of sight and out of mind. a ruling debt clock is a political ploy by republicans. republicans calling foul. my next guest says there is a party double standard. okay, they almost reminded me of vampires that you see. but the debt clock is what the debt clock is. spending more than a chilly in dollars and we are taking in. >> you know, the idea that people would object to this. it is too rich for my blood. i'm trying to reduce my cholesterol.

the problem with the debt clock is not that it is showing up in congress, but that congress is racking up so much that that it doesn't even have time. it can't pass a budget because it's too busy sending us into the poor house. it's time to take it that seriously. economists, virtually every economist agrees that racking up too much debt and that to be a major drag on the economy and long-term economic growth. which is supposedly what everybody, republican and democrat, farmer and businesses, wall street bankers, homeless people -- we all know that we need a better future to move forward and where we are now. neil: if we are making a big deal out of these cuts, i am not minimizing them, but in the scheme of things, they are leaving entitlements completely

out. it has to be addressed pretty soon over the years. i am not optimistic. >> i completely agree with you. i have never heard of anybody curing cancer by ignoring it. i think it's very interesting that every time the republicans try to hold the democratic accountable, it is harassment. can you imagine hiring an employee, an employee says, no, and not dealing with that today? it's a serious avoidance. whether it hits on friday or next month or the end of the year, we are going to have to face these impacts on the private sector. and the democrats are going to be blamed. furthermore, before the election, the president was saying that it takes more than four years. we have it under control. recently he comes out and says, wait, we do not have it under control, we are falling apart. which is it to now that he's up for reelection, we get the truth from this man? >> republicans are saying when

they run for things, they can hardly be the judge. i see where you're coming from on this. but the bottom line is, we have to acknowledge that we have a spending problem. i think it should be addressed. i do not see it as tackling everything right now. >> part of the reason we are in this in the first place is because they couldn't come to an agreement in august 2011. they were working on this and that, you had everybody focused on us. lo and behold, when the devil came down to the details, they were actually going to have to make some hard choices. neil: including the president. >> so when he says harry reid

says this, chuck schumer says is, we don't have a spending problem, it is a revenue issue, we have to get more taxes. what you say? are they smoking something? >> we have a spending problem. >> i am just saying, why can't they be like an alcoholic? >> to your earlier point, everybody is talking around the edges right now. entitlements, 60% of our budget is captured. >> well, i was going to say, let's be clear. what we are actually looking at is $44 billion. 1% of the federal budget in fiscal year 2013. even with sequestration, we will spend more than 2013 we spend in 2012. we have a spending problem,

absolutely. but we do not necessarily have a revenue problem in the sense that revenues are at or near all-time highs. what we do have is an inability to match things with our revenue. we should be spending something closer to what we were spending last year of the bill. >> i think it could quickly get the ball rolling. i just think that we have to get past the blame game. you know, it's sort of like this are not. >> sequestration is something we can go forward with. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: we need to get past whoever it is to blame. democrats, it is what it is. the red is with the red is. it's time to address it. it's time that we move past that. but no one is doing so.

i guess that is my biggest worry. we are still playing the blame game. >> that is true. we are still playing party games. without solving the problem, it's going to get to the point where we will have european-style austerity in this country. we'll have to cut it severely because we are refusing to face it and come to an agreement. i agree with you completely. not the fault of the democrats or republicans. let's cut our spending, let's solve the problem. >> you know, i'm just saying that there are a lot of precedents were the way forward is to cut spending. it will not only help our debt issue and create regime certainty, but we haven't even been able to pass a budget in years. that is a sign of democracy gone off. more importantly, cutting debt and government spending is shown to actually increase economic activity. it reduces the fear of taxes and

higher regulations, all kinds of problems. we need to get serious about this. there are libertarian republicans were pushing forward. the biggest battle that they have has to do with their own party. neil: don't go too far, we will see you back a little later in the show. it is one thing for the chamber of commerce to block the president. but the ceo of this chamber of commerce says it is not about the color of someone's skin. >> he has never had a business, he has never had a job. i had hoped because he was black. shame on me [ lorenzo ] i'm lorenzo. i work for 47 different companies. well, technically i work for one. that company, the united states postal service® works for thousands of home businesses. because at usps.com® you can pay, print

and have your packages picked up for free. i can even drop off free boxes. i wear a lot of hats. well, technically i wear one. the u.s. postal service®, no business too small. ah. 4g, huh? verizon 4g lte. 70megahertz spectrum, end-to-end, pure lte build. the most consistent speeds indoors or out. and, obviously, astonishing throughput. obviously... you know how fast our home wifi is? yeah. this is basically just asast. oh. and verizon's got more fast lte coverage than all other networks combined. it's better. yes. oh, why didn't you just say that? huh-- what is he doing? bjorn earns unlimited rewas for his small business take theseags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjors small busiss earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth why settle for less?

ahh, oh! [ garth ] great businesses serve lited reward here's your wake up call. [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase every day. what's in your wallet? [ crows ] now where's the snooze button?

neil: now barack obama risks

losing his base, not only environmentalists but those who are fearful about what he sees coming down the pipeline. when it comes to this president. >> it's very good to have you. thank you for coming. so you talked about this at the outset. what happened? >> first of all, thank you for having me on your show. things started going downhill in february when he was in on. the first week in february. he issues his first executive order, which was the pro-project labor agreement.

it indicated union only for construction projects over a million dollars on all federal products. >> so that was the first sign to you of what? >> 98% of own construction companies are not human. and they hire black laborers. therefore, if it's a union only, no blacks need to apply. i said that i would go blistered if they did it, and we have been fighting ever since. neil: when you told us to raise this with him, what did he say? >> i did not tell him directly. i talked about it with his chief of staff. i guess they just gave them a

pass. on some of these environmental issues, all the way up to now, gun control, the sequester, i am totally enraged with the person that does not take into account the benefit or security or welfare of the american people. he had his own ideas, his own business, emperor obama does what he wants to do. we need to check them. neil: do you ever worry is a prominent african-american in your own right. when you look at african-american voters and realize that 90 something percent voted for the president, that you are sort of like, you know, in a different vote? we are starting to bit by bit chip away at that. i think as time goes on, people will wake up and smell the coffee. neil: so far the president has the better approval numbers.

no offense to used car dealers, but i'm just saying that he sees that and do you think there could be problems? >> i think the mainstream press has really benefited him. it's massive. it's like staying on the new services. i've never seen anything like it in my life. neil: you are right about that. the president could be pushing this too far. invariably it will offend environmentalist, even though union and others like him breaking on that. by and large, the business community still say he doesn't have their interests. the president says the dow might be a record high. and look at all this activity going on. what you say? >> it will all hit the fan one

day, neil. the corruption is coming. it is just totally irresponsible. it is corrupt. sooner or later you will have to pay the price is. neil: so what would you like to see? stop with the spending hikes? be more aggressive on cutting rather than increasing taxes? >> why do we have a budget, first off, so we know where we are going and where we need to start from. let's have a budget cut and start working on this debt and deficit. my boys don't want to see that mess. my grandchildren don't want to see it. neil: that seems very obvious. thank you so much for stopping by. very good stuff. very good reminders. reminders for everybody. thank you very much. >> thank you, i appreciate it.

neil: and obama confidence that his colleagues are focusing on something else. something that the white house critics are missing. that is coming up next.

neil: my next guest says they have done pretty well under this president. the dow jones is knocking at the door of an all-time record. barack obama is wall street sons doing, his confidante and classmate. robert, it is very good to have you as always. neil: what do you make of this? are we still leery of this president? >> i think that looking forward probably has aligned more than

the pastors would be a pro-immigration reform. they absolutely want corporate tax reform. they don't want the debt ceiling as part of the negotiation. if you look at where he is going over the next few years, they actually align very well. i would tell you that the recent calls we have had between the business community and the white house, which is bipartisan, more than ever before, i think they didn't want the fiscal cliff and they sure don't want the sequestration. neil: to make these cuts, you have these other cuts. do you think that it is presidential to scare americans and isolate? >> it's interesting. i had austan goolsbee who worked on the recent call. and he was talking about the

impact and his view of sequestration as a percent of gdp in the unemployment cuts. the fact is that 760,000 jobs. he is not scaring anyone. this is not the president's numbers. you have ben bernanke speaking. he is speaking from his perspective. you saw what he has done to the stock market by keeping rates low. but he said that this economy is not ready for something blunt you know, you and i have spoken, i would like a balanced deal. >> my perspective is that we need to have revenues on the table. we need to have entitlement reform on the table. we need to have defense on the table. >> i do not see much else on the table. you are a creature of wall street. you have a lot of very wealthy

friends. a lot of the wealthy guys say that they would appreciate it if the president would quit dumping on them. he is limiting my deductions. i am more than paying my fair share. now he is saying how i have to do more. and they are getting pretty annoyed. should they be? >> i would say we need $4.2 trillion total over the ten-year time. okay? a little bit more than halfway there. i have always been of the thought that it should be for a $2 of spending, it should be 1 dollar of revenue. so i am still on course. >> i think we have a spending problem. neil: what are they smoking when they say we do not? >> i have not heard them say that. >> the president said it really

has to do with health care. >> if you look at spending as a percent of gdp, it is up to 24% and revenue is down 14%. usually we are at 18% and 21%. usually there is a 3% deficit. >> as someone who is trying to bring the investments, how do you see this? that he is losing mass, we are at this point, these cuts are coming in because republicans are just catering to their wealthy friends and it's killing us and etc. >> you know, i have to admit the campaign is over and i don't care about that. >> so you have been hearing the speeches? >> yes, but the loophole thing. listen, speaker boehner 30 days ago put 600 billion on the table.

those were itemized deductions. okay, so you cannot say that the revenue should not be on the table. there are a lot of loopholes that should be on the table i do not think the sequestration is a good deal. the one i understand that he is saying president is changing the goalposts are. >> there's a lot of he said she said. i'm not going to get into that. neil: come in wanting you don't like. >> i like the president. i'm not going to say anything. neil: i'm not familiar with health care. i don't like the cost. i absolutely think entitlement reform should be on the table. but that would be part of a 4 trillion-dollar package, not part of the sequestration..3 neil: i have politicians on both sides still afraid to address things because they just think that every american is going to jump on them and crucified him.

>> what i would save in november or december, we have the ability of the $4.3 trillion bill. it includes social security. medicare. it wasn't medicated. but it was medicare. so there were things on the table and then speaker boehner went to that proposal, which really just put taxes on the table. if i was giving speaker boehner advice, which i would like to give to both sides, i would say do not put it on the table. let's make sure that both sides on the table are represented. >> what you think of what i was telling you and what i mentioned earlier. >> it's like kids when they create a mass. i just say, well, you both must

get off your bones. >> i don't know how you fix it. the sides are not speaking. it needs to change. i do not know what will happen friday when they all get together. they be at the 24th our we have another deal. we cannot start kicking the can. neil: my personal theory is that the players don't respect each other. they do not. i'm not blowing smoke. but i will tell you what, persuasion or whatever -- a lot of spokesmen and folks respect you. >> well, thank you. neil: my knee-jerk view of this is until we get players on the other side that we like and respect, it's never going to be solved.

[talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: it's an interesting process. >> being an outside advisor fits well for me today. neil: grubber, it is always a pleasure. when it comes to either party. meanwhile, why conservatives are saying give up. i am just going to give you one hint here. it is not the same as a conservative group that holds off for the big guy. coming up next

>> after considerable discussion and research, i have decided to participate in medicaid expansion of the affordable care act. neil: new jersey governor chris christie, the latest republican to give the president health care lot a chance. my next guest says he is pandering, playing a tumble. let's just say they are feeling the love. ceo barry sloane and ben franke. welcome. >> i don't like what he's doing here. i think he is showing leadership though, and if we saw more leadership in washington, we wouldn't be where we are today. neil: one think he is doing is

pushing a program that is heavily flawed. >> it is here. as they said to me when i was with you last, if we stop bellyaching, it's here. you embrace it or not. >> i am in a crowd that does work with it the. neil: okay. >> welcome i think philosophically he is making a mistake. neil: when you see the impact that this law he comes, you almost have to take it. because that is part of what is putting the own place. >> that was my point. neil: that was not your point. [laughter] not because you don't dress up,

you are a successful businessman. >> my point is that it's here, you need to take it. pushing it away is not going to change it. neil: by the way, on the subject of chris christie, are you surprised by the conservative republican communities? >> i think it shows tolerance. neil: i think that they have the loudest voices. >> i don't think they are the dominant interest of the party. there are many independents who are actually fiscally conservative. >> again, i would think that the republican party is much to splintered right now. they have to come together. the far right has to move.

neil: what is it with them? i don't think that they know what is going on. what happened? >> there is no leadership currently. obama has done a very nice job of really getting a consensus. i don't think people like his policies, but they like him. republicans are totally devoid of leadership at this point in time. that is the problem that they are currently having. that is why they are losing elections to one of the things you have been saying if you can't just walk away to the other side and throw up your hands. you have to deal with it. just like dealing with the democratic legislature. if no deal better than a deal that ultimately, in this case, the root republicans think is

bad? >> no deal is bad. >> everyone talks about a way to avoid sequestration for republicans. for them to look at more revenues in the future. i look at that and say, well, they already have. what do you say? >> this is a great opportunity to begin the first major reduction in spending. >> do you really think they will ever get that? >> oh, yes, it will happen. >> it is only one or 2%. neil: you guys are smart businessman. >> i don't think that happens. i would take issue with the democratic leadership. neil: the president has a higher approval rating. that doesn't mean anything.

but for now, it does. >> who is going to say no to giving me more? what child is going to say, thank you, and cut that. >> it is not an increasingly indebted base of supporters who may look. >> he will until they don't. he will until they don't. until it all doesn't come together. neil: i think he is willing a modern day at the fdr coalition. >> you have high unemployment, wealth destruction, and i going through the roof. he is still a popular president. neil: audubon your members? >> small business owners. they don't like the kind of talk. they do not like to talk about

minimum wage. they would like to see -- i know it sounds funny, they would like to see sequestration. neil: any cuts are better than none. >> i go along with that 100%. i think it will be painful. probably painful for 12 months or so. we are seeing the economy slowly turn in spite of all these programs. neil: the markets are false leader? >> i'm not sure about that. but i think we have certainly seen a pullback. >> zero interest rates, that is driving the equity market. money has to go somewhere. >> the fed keeps pumping money into the economy as well. zero interest rates, it's not real. >> thank you both very much. in the meantime, now these guys

who would not allow cameras in their courtroom just ruled it is perfectly fine for the government to get into your room. did the supreme court just approved an assault on your privacy? we are not coming up next alec, for this mission i upgraded your smart phone. ♪ right. but the most important feature of all is... the capital one purchase eraser. i can redeem the double miles i earned with my venture card to erase recent travel purchases. d with a few clicks, this mission never happened. uh, what's this button do? [ electricity zaps ] ♪ you requested backup? yes. yes i did. what's in your wallet?

neil: your privacy. nevermind it was a five to four vote. the government could go too far. for privacy experts, perhaps a chilling one. the highest court and win giving the government more power to snoop on you, your phone calls and e-mails and all of it. the fallout from big brother barreling down.

what do you think of this? >> well, the first is the supreme court basically said, they tried it with a catch-22. the people who are bringing this case could not see her. they had no ability to do that. unless the government actually says, we are watching every step that you may, you cannot fight them in court and say you don't have a right here. beyond that, this is part of what the obama administration is picking up. running as fast as they can away from established constitutional principles about transparency and openness and all sorts of things that we used to take for granted. neil: it is a court that rules on us. essentially saying, there are some cases where this is

warranted. what worries me is that doing that is that you now condone something that will be like a genie out of the bottle and the problem. >> absolutely. i actually had the fortune of being in the courtroom when this case is being argued. it was on the day of hurricane sandy. i went down with a friend of mind and we got to sit and watch the case as the winds were swirling around. not quite the devastation you had in new york. it was very fascinating when we saw the obama administration there are doing for this case. which was left over from the bush administration policies from the bush administration. there is concern out there that this is going to be pervasive and we are in a different time than we ever have been before. [talking over each other] neil: here is what we worry about. using our security as your help. you are now hooking in to a lot

of people's private lives, using it as the excuse. >> i completely agree with you. what happens is when you start spying on people, you create a social unrest. i think the long-term causality of that is you suppress the country. america is built on the premise of freedom. neither code that are begun. i don't. i really love how the british hired the ira bombings. the people who are trying to terrorize us, they want us fearful. we don't need to succumb to that. we need to say that we are about freedom. i do think people being monitored does affect them on a social level. neil: he made a very good point. the hold drone thing, the

security and keeping people safe. it is an extension of babysitting and looking after you. then i wonder, are you only looking after your friends or enemies? >> the biggest problem is the tendency towards these dragnet. we really don't have to say who we are looking for are what we are looking for, but just setting up a dragnet for communications that involve american citizens. we are talking about an administration that is saying that the president alone has the right to determine what american citizen is an enemy of the state that he can take out without talking to the legislative branch or the judicial branch. he won't even share his legal reasoning with the senate or the house of representatives. >> one of the pieces of abyss

that was part of the extension was the creation of this court. that was to give the oversight. but you do have to go before a judge and be able to issue this. >> what are your thoughts? >> that is exactly right. where does the slippery slope start, begin, where does it end? i think that we need to stay away from the extremes, i think that we need to stick with our constitution. if people don't like the way that works here, they can live somewhere else. but america is about freedom, and i do think this is important. >> unlimited government leads to unlimited problems. >> but we do not have unlimited time. we will see tomorrow.